• patatas@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The problem is, his stock options may not have vested, and Carney would be aware of the vesting schedule. It could be years before he (or whoever is managing the trust) could exercise those options and/or sell those shares.

    In other words, the trust may not be ‘blind’ in practice.

    This was the original criticism from reporters such as Rosie Barton, and many of Carney’s supporters never bothered to try to understand the issue.

      • patatas@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And when will that be? Will that happen while he is PM? Carney knows, and we don’t. And that’s the problem!

              • patatas@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Personally I’ve not heard of a PM having millions in unvested stock options before this one, so, not sure how standard it is.

                If Poilievre was doing the same, would you have the same response?

                  • patatas@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    We don’t have a clear legal mechanism, but we to have the power of public outrage.

                    The whole point of conflict of interest legislation is that politicians should not have, nor be seen to have, opportunity for personal gain.

                    Carney could easily clear this up to satisfy critics like myself. Choosing not to only makes it look worse, frankly.

                    People mad about Poilievre not having a security clearance should also be mad about this.